We all lost in the Shared Leave Bill debate

Toxic politics hurts us all....

This week, Labour voted against The Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Shared Leave) Amendment Bill. The bill, by National’s Nicola Willis, would have allowed both parents, not just the birthing parent, to share parental leave. It offered no increase in entitlement. Folks have argued it shows Labour have lost their way or that National are pretending they now care about parents. So, who won this debate?

I would argue: Absolutely fucking nobody.

When I saw the media attention around the Shared Leave Bill, I wanted to provide an explainer. After all, my audience is mostly parents. So, I decided to watch the House debate, which included Labour’s list MP Camilla Belich stating why Labour wouldn’t support the bill.

So, you do not have to watch it, here is a recap: Belich gave a history lesson on how Bill English used some kind of special veto against increasing Paid Parental Leave to 26 weeks in 2015. Labour, trade unions and parents fought for the leave.

Belich then repeated that the Shared Leave Bill would “reduce the entitlement of paid leave in terms of time.” She also said: “If this bill was introduced some children would receive less paid time available to their parents than they currently receive.” As she said this she was shouted down by National MPs.

There was a lot of yelling and I wanted to yell myself. And then ACT’s Simon Court pointed out that people should probably be able to speak without being yelled at.

And I thought, HOLY WILLIAM SHATNER!, if someone from ACT is the voice of reason, God help us.

Baby, I feel you.

Of course, the whole thing went down like spilt (breast) milk. PM Chris Hipkins talked about “the science” of “childhood attachment” and how important it is to be at home with a parent for the first six months (*Stares in cost-of-living crisis*).

Nicola Willis was absolutely frothing in delight at this statement, saying - “And to have people at the highest level, suggest that we haven’t done the right thing by our children, that is deeply hurtful”.

While you might view all of National’s policies and indeed the party’s entire history and foundation as “deeply hurtful” to low-income parents, the debate continued.

This time with Carmel Sepuloni talking about breast feeding. This was another own goal from Labour, who seem to not have a single working media advisor right now, which resulted in a full girl-boss mode Nicola Willis saying: “I’d point out that some of us did that while returning to work by pumping milk in bathrooms, and THAT. IS. WHAT. I. DID” (Emphasis is mine, she did a head nod, you really had to see it).

If by now, you just desperately want a bunch of wildly privileged rich people to stop talking about leave like any of them care about the people who actually need it - just wait, it gets better!

In the House, Willis shared an email from a parent of a child who spent their early years in and out of Starship Hospital, who said the bill would have been “life changing” for their family.

Sepuloni then retaliated with “I would ask that parent if she was aware that National did not support Paid Parental Leave when it was introduced back in 2002, and I would show this House’s track record..”.

I would argue a parent with a child who is in hospital doesn’t give a single shit about Labour or National and what they’re fighting about. Nothing in this debate meant anything tangibly helpful for parents fighting for the lives of their kids.

And there lies the issue. A bunch of out-of-touch politicians using parents as a way to point score politically while we suffer in a cost-of-living crisis that only the so-called “minor” parties will even acknowledge exists.

I was back at mahi 11 weeks after I had my baby. I finished writing a speech while in labour so I could get my work in on time. I did not do this because I cared about my career, I did it so I could pay my rent.

My husband had to return to work a few days after our very sick baby was born because his employer threatened to fire him if he took the full two weeks off that he’d asked for. Because our baby was so sick, he had to stay at home with him when I went back to work.

I pumped at work, endured comments like “is that hygienic?” and “are you still doing that?” Had my milk thrown out of the staff fridge, pumped in agony while working in a tiny room with no windows, stayed in hospital all night then worked all day. My husband chopped wood for $10 an hour at night to get us any extra bit of income before we went back to a damp and cold rental.

I haven’t forgotten what it was like.

I wasn’t a girl boss. And while I’d absorbed all the Nathan Wallis BS about how my child would turn into suicidal, hate-filled gremlin with attachment issues if I went back to work - I wasn’t a Playcentre mum, just a filled with shame, trying to survive mum.

I would argue, ten years on it’s even harder for most parents now than it was for me - even with 26 weeks rather than 14 weeks.

Shared parenting leave isn’t new. In Britain, where the bill was introduced at 2015, it has not led to more shared parenting and “high-earning professionals” AKA Nicola Willis types are the ones using it.

This bill was not the answer to the hell many parents go through in their attempts to stay home with their baby. Neither should it have been shot down.

But what matters more is the debate – because that’s all we are left with. It was toxic and awful, and it simply reminded many parents that the two major parties are too busy fighting amongst themselves to fight for us.